tv Bulls Bears FOX Business January 14, 2018 2:00am-2:30am EST
place, any time, anywhere. theirs is a war story that deserves to be told. i'm oliver north. good night. be. leland: we will be tomorrow see you tomorrow morning. dagen: big bonuses, higher wages , lower utility bills, all coming from companies getting tax cuts that are permanent. now, one lawmaker wants congress to make the individual tax cuts permanent. with that put more money in american's pockets permanently? hi everybody i'm dagen mcdowell, this is bulls & bears. to bulls & bears this week gary b. smith, jonas max ferris, john layfield along with lee car and jessica carlyle. welcome to everybody. gary b., what would making individual tax cuts permanent do for every day americans? >> well dagen i think it's very simple. we've seen what its done for corporate america
across-the-board whether you say it's the corporations or the people that work for these corporations, they've benefited in almost every metric and you went through some of them right at the top of the show. for the individual, the individual has not yet seen money back in their pocket but we've seen every time we've put money back in their pockets not by some tax credit but by cutting marginal rates like reagan did, like kennedy did and so many presidents down the line have done. it is a benefit both to the individual and because it's a benefit to the individual, it's a benefit to society too. the united states, we should make it permanent and what it does is the added benefit is it puts the government on a diet. they will come and say we need the money five years 10 years out we'll need the money. no, you need to start spending less, so it's really, i think the economy the individual, everyone gets a double benefit from this and it needs to be permanent right now.
dagen: john 2 million people have gotten bonuses from companies because of this tax reform. just imagine what would happen to the economy if you also made those individual tax cuts permanent. should we could we? >> yes, absolutely we should and we could and corporate america also look earnings revisions have not been adjusted for tax policy yet, so most people think earnings provisions will go up especially in the case of banks around 20%, that's not factored into the market yet so you'll see a leg up in the market but on individual rates gary b. is right look at historical precedence, he forgot to mention coolidge in 24 and bush in 2001 in addition to kennedy and reagan. gdp went up every time and treasury revenue went up every single time. the deficit is a complete different question we're at 19% of gdp for tax revenue. the economy can't take any more. the fact these congress cannot stay within the budget is a complete separate issue. you give money back to americans , gdp is 70% controlled
by consumers, you'll see it in the economy and people's pocket books. dagen: lee the reason the republicans didn't do it is because they need to get to that 60 votes and that means getting democrats on board. >> [laughter] yeah i don't know how that's going to happen but i'm all for the tax cuts being permanent except i believe that we have to make sacrifices in order to make it happen. we can't just not make the cut backs. i know we're talking about gary b. is talking about putting the pressure on. we need to put pressure on and hard to see those be made and i think it will benefit the economy but not happen unless we make sacrifices. dagen: jonas, everybody talks about the top tax rate is extremely low for individuals at 37% it was 35% under president bush's tax cuts and it was 28% under ronald reagan, why couldn't we potentially make these individual cuts permanent? >> okay, i hate to be the only person whose against individual tax cuts, but look, the deficits
are not going away any time soon it's not like 2001 or 2000 where we had surpluses that you could play around with individual tax breaks. the bottom line is you'll cut taxes every type of tax cut doesn't lead to the next level of economic growth and you need to be offsetting economic growth because of the deficit that's growing right? when you cut corporate tax cuts, it leads to savings and investment decisions that can grow the economy. when you double the child care tax credit they get to spend more money everyone likes to have their money back but it doesn't lead to an investment decision that grows the economy. when you go to the tax foundation website they explain how this works but you get very little growth from the low level income tax cuts or tax credit and all this that goes on to get votes and the high end tax cuts that the are for businesses actually lead to economic growth unfortunately people or voters vote and they want the little tax breaks and everything so the bottom line is you need to go from maximum economic growth, this package sort of does that, the best it can we're still going to have to cut spending to get budgets under control but
you can't just give individuals more tax cuts. it doesn't pay for itself at the same rate a corporate tax cut does. dagen: but ideologically it's what gary b. talks about week in week out it's we make better decisions with individuals with our money than politicians do and even bernie sanders floated the idea of making the middle class tax cuts permanent and then when ted cruz said okay, let's do this he was like well that's not right it was taken out of context that's my reaction. >> when he said anything i don't think he's ever agreed with me that i know of but i actually think we should be having this conversation and also talking about the cuts of the corporate tax rates leveling this out what jonas was proposing here. this is more than about economic growth. the republicans fulfilling promises to the american people. donald trump campaigned on that and said i'll put more money back in your pocket. so i think that it is important. i think that democrats should get on board with this if it's not just a massive act for the
top set of earners. if it's really about the middle and lower classes that's important even just on a messag ing basis and i think we should be able to get 60 votes when you consider that we have 10 senators democrat senators that are up for reelection in 2018 and red states so it's an important conversation to have and to play with that corporate rate a little bit to maybe make the individuals matter more. dagen: gary b., did jessica just get on board with making the individual tax cuts permanent is that what we just heard? >> it's funny dagen i was ready to go, jessica drives me crazy. but in this case, take out jessica and substitute in of course the perennial jonas. >> thank you, jessica for final ly seeing light. i think we finally moved you over to the dark side. to jonas's point, he comes at the perspective that the government is some wizard of oz back there empowered with
pulling the levers of the economy, making sure we push here, pull here, to drive economic growth. that is not the government's job the government's job is to do a few things, defense, build a few federal highways, provide a safety net for people. that kind of stuff. it's not their job to run gdp. their job is to say what is the minimum amount of money we need to run the government? everything else that you bring in mr. and mrs. taxpayer is yours. that's the job it's not the job that's like oh, if we do this we'll have higher gdp growth. that is bs, and i wish jonas would get behind it other than that i love him. >> i'm not comparing the government with your money against the individual. i'm comparing the corporate finance department at wal-mart to the individual and that is a battle they're going to lose every time. the individual will go to applebees or speculate on cryptocurrency, wal-mart is going to decide whether we should increase the dividend or
pay off debtor do bonuses for employee's, raise our wages, look at the decisions they made. people don't behave that way and because of that you get higher economic growth and something the government is saying so it's the tax foundation and you need to get behind that. >> i understand but it shouldn't be the government oh, if we cut it here we'll get higher economic growth. cut it for everyone. dagen: yeah! >> that's great if you're running a surplus and trying to get votes but if you have a limited amount of tax cuts. >> but at the beginning the government needs to tighten its belt. lee was saying basically the same thing. we need to come at it from both perspectives. dagen: john, you will -- >> in the world of limited tax cuts you have to choose where they get the most bang for your buck and in that world it's wal-mart not the household. dagen: john you were once a professional fighter you break this up and that's the final word. >> jonas, if you repeat yourself , it makes you repetitive it doesn't make you correct. listen the budget argument is
just wrong. we went from 5 trillion in debt to 20 trillion in 16 years and that was in a high tax environment and low tax environment high corporate tax rate low corporate tax rate. these guys can't balance the budget. this argument over tax cuts dealing with deficits is absolutely ridiculous. we have a complete separate issue give money back to americans let them do with it it's their money. dagen: thanks guys and gals cavuto on business 20 minutes from now charles payne is in for neil. charles? charles: hi dagen. we know which immigration meeting is making headlines today, but is something specific about this one that captured our attention plus a new rule for some medicaid recipients who are able to work for government assistance? some say it's heartless but someone here says it's the best thing for them and taxpayers in the long run. see you soon. dagen: thanks charles we can't wait but coming up next, right here, it's no secret that cities nationwide are fighting for amazon's second headquarters,
dagen: officials across the country shouting from the roof top for amazon to pick their city for its second headquarters , but when it comes to what perks they've promised the tech giant, that's right, silence. crickets. many states and cities refusing to disclose what they put on the table including tax breaks over fears it could put them at a competitive disadvantage. for whatever city is chosen amazon is expected to spend more than $5 billion in construction and bring in as many as 50,000 jobs. should these cities and regions reveal anything that's paid with tax dollars. >> i think they absolutely should because i think this goes at a lot of things. number one it's the individuals money the taxpayers money and they should know what's happening with their money. i also think this says something about the leadership of those
states and communities what are they offering to try to improve these places that really need the jobs, there's a lot of cities out there that could benefit from having a big employer but are going by the way side otherwise so it's important it becomes something people know what it's all about and what's on the table. dagen: john do the taxpayers deserve to know what's been put out there? >> no, they don't and i respectfully disagree with lee and don't deserve to know what's been put out there. they deserve to know after its happened. this is a competitive bid now you have 230 different entities around the country bidding for this amazon second headquarters somebody is going to get this and this is how this should work cities and states should bid for this and want the most and is able to give the most should be able to get this and 50,000 jobs that's a huge economic boost but is a competitive bid i'm for transparency of government but not in this case because what you'll do is you'll let everybody else know what you're bid bidding and somebody will outbid you by a dollar. dagen: gary b., by revealing it
you could jeopardize actually getting this second headquarters >> that's absolutely true but let me just one little side bar here. i hate this whole bidding thing. you know, if amazon was really ben ever elent they should just say do you know what forget all of the tax breaks we'll go with youngstown, ohio and rejuvenate that economy. of course they won't but that's what i'd like in a perfect world to a point that lee and john made they both made excellent points i come down on the side of lee. it's just the same as the federal government whose money is it? you're asking probably to raise taxes to issue municipal bonds to do all this stuff, use eminent domain to take over a private property, all for the sake of amazon. i think that's great. seattle is certainly benefited from it but in the end it's the people's money i understand you may be showing your cards, well tough. dagen: should these cities and regions fess what they're offer
ing for jeff bezos and his hundred billion dollar pocket book? >> i think so but i do want to make it clear i actually agree with what everybody has been saying which doesn't usually happen and we all remember that gary actually agreed with me which is a first ever in the last segment. i do think there should be transparency about this and there is a way to do that and more broad strokes, if the community is concerned about what is being given away and this isn't just money we're talking about eminent domain for instance as gary mentioned there and it's important to have those conversations but i think that when the occupants of wherever this headquarters may go here are those 50,000 jobs right and the $5 billion investment. they're pretty cool is whatever it is being offered so beyond that it is their money you're spending and be honest but i don't know if it's every single detail. dagen: jonas, to you finally, but again it's kind of obvious whose going to be the most desperate. do we even need to know the numbers i think new jersey is offering about $7 billion in
breaks of course. >> could you imagine being the guy or gal that works for for amazon that gets to go around to states to say what do you got for me i'm coming into town looking to move a factory and john is right you can't make this public. it's bad enough that that person is like atlanta is giving us free electricity what do you got like you can't do that. if you want an example of a company being too big what the negatives are this is basically it other than that there's a lot of positives but this is market powers like when are they going to give them the keys to the white house. down the road the rates are growing. dagen: that's a conversation for another day again jeff bezos looks like he's in fighting shape worth of north of $100 billion you never know thanks guys and gals cashing in over an hour from now trish regan what do you have coming up trish: hi dagen detainees at guantanamo bay amid new calls to should the prison down for good why someone here says that could actually be a very costly move. plus, consumers outraged because of a massive new soda tax.
what's the government telling us what we can and cannot drink i'll see you on cashing in 11:3. dagen: thank you trish we'll be watching but up here first want to bring both parties together? president trump floating an idea that democrats and republicans might sink their teeth into, but someone here says it will end up costing you, next.
dagen: that's right next saturday neil is kicking off his new show cavuto live next week every week and we'll be joining him thanks to you our cost of freedom fans our most loyal viewers we've been the best two hours in business anywhere year in year out and now neil is taking it live we wish him major success and we'll be right there by his side hope to see you there. we're right here first. a battle over pork spending starting to sizzle on capitol hill, lawmakers scheduling hearings for next week on whether or not they should bring back earmarks. john with our national debt topping $20 trillion can we really afford to bring back pork barrel projects? >> no this is what we have no control of anything in washington d.c. this is theft. plain and simple imagine that people saying that you only get
things done by bribing people. how about we erent politicians to do the right thing for the right reason? i new it's an archaic idea but perhaps it would work for a change. dagen: gary b., yes or no on earmarks? >> well, yes i guess and here is why. dagen: good. >> we are the united states of america. we're not called the kingdom of america, where a king can rule, we have all of the states fighting with each other. you give me this i give you that that's the way it works, yes it's horrible but that's the way bills are passed because the states look out for themselves as it should be. dagen: jonas, my personal favorite earmark shame manure management what do you say? >> somethings right in the empire in the 80s in new york city you couldn't get a concrete truck to show up without greasing somebody's palms that's how it works and now small states like alaska are deciding big policy decisions like repeal ing obamacare because
they're not getting the bridges to nowhere they get to get votes and now we have no policies any more. dagen: jess? >> no on the earmarks, but maybe we could reform the process and make it a little bit cleaner and then we could get that i agree this but i don't think the american people should be ripped off so i'm saying no until we can do it in a cleaner way. dagen: lee unleash your pent-up rage. >> no, there should not be earmarks but i think this is the exact reason why the american people does not trust congress. they're basically stealing our money and acting in their own best interest and not necessarily for the american people. no, no, no. dagen: do you know what earmarks are? i'll leave you with this shrimp on a treadmill. thanks guys a special thanks to lee and jessica for joining us today and all these days. the name that one of our bulls & bears will give you a 100% return, 100%, next. when you think of miami you think of,you know,rich,glamour
but 5 miles away from the beach there's people who have never seen a beach. i was confused why somebody was in this situation especially in america. ♪music:oooh,oooh,oooh so when i started joshua's heart foundation it was a key thing to be able to engage youth in the foundation. to help them participate. ♪music:oooh,oooh,oooh i think passing on the torch and lighting a new flame in another person to do good is probably the point of the bigger missions i have. ♪music:aha,aha,aha so we are each making a bigger difference. ♪music:oooh,oooh,oooh that's it! just giving back and producing love for everybody.
dagen: predictions, chart man, go. >> blast from the past, 18 years of predictions, dagen i'm going to end with my best one. just buy the market. it's going to double in the next 10 years. dia, dow diamonds. dagen: jonas, are you that bull ish? >> not in the next 10 months she's going down. dagen: 10 years come on we get a double, yes or no? >> 10 years yes. 10 months no. dagen: john, predictions? >> the new tax cut policies helps companies have a 5% yield up 20% in a year. dagen: are you along black stone gary b.? >> i'm not its shot straight up recently. i like it wait for a pullback though. dagen: jonas, your prediction? >> watch out tesla, gm is making some major advancements in self- driving cars the latest one was just production ready no steering wheel gm up 20% in a year. look mom, no hands. dagen: no steering wheel no
pedals john i think you'd take that over a car driven by jonas though. >> [laughter] i might be able to back up his scooter after 18 years i still have no idea what he says in predictions. dagen: i love y our viewers charles is now. charles: unprecedented, remarkable, extraordinary, to some of the words used by the mainstream media to describe president trump's televised immigration meeting earlier this week. and despite some controversial comments at another meeting, deirdre bolton says this is public relations on immigration and this is what everybody should be talking about hello i'm charles p in for neil cavuto , to charlie gasparino, and adam lashinsky, deirdre it was remarkable something many people have never seen before. >> it was indeed and listen president trump understands the media. i mean, it's not a thing he had a very successful tv career and that was a great visual. it did get people